national service: the singapore solution

as expected, the over reaction mentality is again put into motion. heavier penalties and more stringent regulations to curb ns evasion. children below the age of 16 will now be affected if they stay overseas for more than 3 months without permit. fines and fines. this is the standard way of public policy making. just whack the people with more fines, use the stick, use more disincentives. why can't the approach be more incentives for citizens and those who serve ns as a dutiful citizen? the concept of tightening the noose around the citizens neck is very negative. the nation cannot force the people who longer wish to stay... to stay. by tightening the noose, it only increase the push factor for people to want to get out. and citizenship becomes so restrictive and a huge burden of can't dos. i would thought a better approach would be to let those who want to leave... leave. and then add on the incentives for citizens who stay, who do their duties as citizens. make citizenship really worthwhile, an attractive and desirable choice. not a citizenship that has nothing more to offer except more restrictions, regulations and penalties. why are singaporeans be put on a leash? what is clear now is that citizenship is nothing better, but a worse off option. is that what singapore citizenship is all about? where is the value and heart and soul to be a citizen?

ge: you want my vote? listen to me

in every election it is always the politicians who tell the voters this is what i am going to do for you. this is what you will get when you elect me. never did the politicians ask the voters what they want. and this is about the best time for the voters to register their minds and thoughts. you want my vote, listen to me. this is what i want. this is what i think is good for me. is there a platform for the people to tell the politicians what they want? the internet chat sites and blogs and the media forum may be the place for it. this is an opportunity presented for the voters to say their piece. these are what i want, if you want my vote. 1. i want my cpf back at 55. you may keep $10k for a medical insurance. the rest is my money and i want it back. 2. i want public transport to be returned to the people. deprivatise public transport and return it to the stats board as an essential service for the people. no profit motive. 3. no more essential services to be privatised. if they do, make sure that the citizen's access to such service is not subject to profit motive. 4. take care of the citizens first. all jobs between $1000 to $10k must first be offered to the citizens. only if no takers shall it be given to ft. exceptions can be given to mncs. all govt and stats boards and glcs must prioritise to give jobs to citizens. 5. keep medical cost down with every citizen accessible to c wards if he so chooses. these are just the starters from me, for my vote. don't tell me what is good for me. i tell you what is good for me.

budget terminal budget decision

when i switched on the news i chanced to hear sin boon ann asking the minister of transportation whether the building of the budget terminal was a hasty decision. it seems that till now only one budget airline has committed to use the budget terminal. what about the rest of the budget airlines? lim hwee hua said that they were adopting a wait and see approach. sin boon ann also questioned whether there were excess capacity at changi where budget airlines could operate temporary while the situation was still developing. or could the transport ministry also adopt a wait and see approach before committing millions to the new budget terminal. when have singapore reached this state of affair when million dollar decision were done hastily and now we got a practically empty terminal. a buangkok terminal? but there were only what, 4 budget airlines in operation? so one out of four, that is 25% of the market. not too bad statistically. it would only look funny when the rest of the airlines choose not to use the budget terminal. why is transportation in singapore so difficult to handle? must go to waterloo street and bathe with flower water, i think.

when will the teachers grow up?

students prevented from entering schools to collect 'o' level results or told to come back later, properly attired, hair dyed black and not in primary colours. these were the actions taken by the educators of our children, who deemed spaghetti straps, short skirts or punkish hair improper or undesirable inside a school compound. many years back in the 60s or 70s, long hair rock stars were not allowed to perform in singapore unless their hair are cropped short, like singaporeans. today this kind of mentality is still with our teachers. better tell choktong and hsienloong cannot wear red shirts while on tv. must wear clean white long sleeve shirts. by the way, the school children have left the schools after sitting for the 'o' level. some could be working or in other schools. they came back only for the result slips. why are these schools still think that they have the right to regiment them? can they let the young have their fun? why must every young one dressed up like old spinsters or monks? come on teachers, relax lah. if they are bad they are bad. otherwise it is just some innocent fun of the adolescence. making them come back in dresses that the teachers found palatable is not going to change anything. i think the teachers need to grow up. with such rigid minds, how can there be creativity?

futuristic singapore

the infrastructure of singapore will be designed to be handicap friendly, from lifts, walkways, roads, to public transport. with the ageing population, singapore is preparing itself for a nation of wheelchair bound communters. i am not sure of the economics, but i think it would be easier and more economical to set up a dedicated transport service to cater for these people than to turn the whole island into a white elephant. i have seen all the beautiful metal strips and buttons on mrt station floors. i have yet to see one handicap person using them. sure there will be some handicap people using them. but the frequency and cost of having them need to be studied carefully. and stop passing the buck of a poorly thought out solution to the commuters. it is easy to make everyone pays. another crooked bridge solution. i am not against making life easier for the handicaps. but i think the solution must be practical and cost effective. imagine redesigning all the buses for wheelchairs? how many buses need to be redesigned and how much will it cost? would it be better to have a fleet of taxis with such additional capabilities and be subsidised by the transport companies. more thinking needs to go into the concept before ploughing more public money into it. it will be public money, everyone's money. the transport companies are going to pass the buck to everyone. so please think carefully when using public money. transport companies have a moral responsibility to spend such money wisely and efficiently. if they want to spend on more gimmicks, please pay for it themselves, from their own pockets. maybe it will be better to have powered wheelchair vehicles. afterall at that age, many will have all the time in the world to sight see at their own time.